i keep *trying* to move from portupgrade to portmaster
in [Ports]
|
From: Jim Riggs on 6 Aug 2010 10:32 On Aug 6, 2010, at 9:28 AM, Sandra Kachelmann wrote: > Hmm... > > I just tried to update an outdated system with: > > $ portmaster --no-confirm -G -m 'BATCH=yes' -a > > after a while it asked me whether I want to delete pcre - so -m > BATCH=yes does not work. Somewhere along the thread you lost your -d. _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports(a)freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe(a)freebsd.org"
From: "B. Estrade" on 6 Aug 2010 10:46 On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 04:37:42PM +0200, Sandra Kachelmann wrote: > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Adam Vande More <amvandemore(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Sandra Kachelmann > > <s.kachelmann(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hmm... > >> > >> I just tried to update an outdated system with: > >> > >> $ portmaster --no-confirm -G -m 'BATCH=yes' -a > >> > >> after a while it asked me whether I want to delete pcre - so -m > >> BATCH=yes does not work. > > > > Come on, please read the man page. > > Ignore me if you don't want to help. The man page is too huge. The man page is not that big, I just checked due to my interest in this thread. portmaster seems to be very configurable and scriptable, but I would suggest that among the "examples" in the man page be the idiom(s) one might want to use if a complete batch process is desired. Cheers, Brett > > Sandra > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports(a)freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe(a)freebsd.org" -- B. Estrade <estrabd(a)gmail.com> _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports(a)freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe(a)freebsd.org"
From: Doug Barton on 6 Aug 2010 16:57 On 08/06/2010 04:52, Martin Schweizer wrote: > Hello Sandra > > I was in a similar situation. I found the following paramters very usefull: > > portmaster -a -d --no-confirm > > -a: Take all installed ports > -d: Delete any dependicies That's not what -d means. You would be better off with the option to not delete any distfiles, along with occasionally running the standalone feature to clean distfiles. hth, Doug -- Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/ Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports(a)freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe(a)freebsd.org"
From: Doug Barton on 6 Aug 2010 17:03 On 08/06/2010 05:44, Sandra Kachelmann wrote: > Thank you for your answer (and everyone else who replied). This is > exactly the reason why I keep going back to portupgrade. Default > OPTIONS almost always work for me - if not I go to the ports directory > and run make config then let the --batch option of portinstall deal > with everything. > > It would be extremely nice if there would be a --batch option that > would act like portupgrade. Now that you've been more specific about what you want, I have good news for you. :) In the current development version of portmaster I have revamped the -G option so that it acts more like BATCH=YES in the sense that it specifically skips all OPTIONS dialogs. Therefore you should be able to accomplish at least this part of what you want with -G alone, without using BATCH=YES at all. I plan to commit the update very soon, hopefully this weekend. I'm currently doing an extensive code review/whitespace realignment/etc. hth, Doug -- Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/ Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports(a)freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe(a)freebsd.org"
From: Jim Trigg on 6 Aug 2010 17:33
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Doug Barton <dougb(a)freebsd.org> wrote: > On 08/06/2010 04:34, jhell wrote: >> Do not prompt for a backup package creation failure > > I need to add an option for this, but it will likely be an "expert" > option that you can set in the rc file. The theory is that package > creation failure should be a rare thing, and since portmaster has no way > to know what packages are really critical to any given system it treats > inability to safely recover from an upgrade failure as a critical error. > However, having the ability to disable this is an oft-requested feature, > I just haven't gotten to it yet. > >> and force creation of whatever you have on the system already? > > Not sure what this means, can you explain it in more detail? One example I have (unfortunately): I accidentally wiped out /usr/local/. Reinstalling all my ports was easy -- first reinstall portmaster and then run "portmaster -af". The problem was that for every single port I had to say "Yes, ignore the fact that the port wasn't already there". So I had to tend the process all the way through. An option to force ignoring the package creation failure would allow that to be an unattended process. Jim _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports(a)freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe(a)freebsd.org" |